| Literature DB >> 32938394 |
Sangwoo Lee1, Eun Kyung Choe2,3, So Yeon Kim3,4, Hua Sun Kim5, Kyu Joo Park6, Dokyoon Kim7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Introducing deep learning approach to medical images has rendered a large amount of un-decoded information into usage in clinical research. But mostly, it has been focusing on the performance of the prediction modeling for disease-related entity, but not on the clinical implication of the feature itself. Here we analyzed liver imaging features of abdominal CT images collected from 2019 patients with stage I - III colorectal cancer (CRC) using convolutional neural network (CNN) to elucidate its clinical implication in oncological perspectives.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Colorectal cancer; Convolutional neural network; Radiomics
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32938394 PMCID: PMC7495853 DOI: 10.1186/s12859-020-03686-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Bioinformatics ISSN: 1471-2105 Impact factor: 3.169
Fig. 1Study design. Overview of the analysis framework. Feature extraction on the abdominal CT, 50 × 50 pixel ROIs, was done by utilizing a pre-trained convolutional neural network. We preprocessed them based on the significance of association with 5-year liver metastasis (5YLM) rate by performing univariate logistic regression analysis. Principal component analysis (PCA) was done for feature reduction in dimensionality and this generated new sets of feature. We used two machine learning algorithms, such as logistic regression classification (LR) and random forest classification (RFC) to train prediction models for 5YLM and compared the performances of each model. Among the models to predict 5YLM, we used the highest AUC model to perform multivariate logistic regression to association between the image features and 5YLM statistically. Then Kaplan Meier analysis was done by the principal components (PCs) for metachronous liver metastasis free survival and overall survival. We done a correlation analysis between the significant PCs and the clinical variable in Table 1. We also applied the highest AUC model for 5YLM to predict 5-year mortality and observed whether the liver image feature could do a predictive role for 5-year mortality
Demographic features of the study population
| Liver metastasis, no | Liver Metastasis, yes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 62.3 ± 9.2 | 63.1 ± 9.5 | 0.390 |
| Age > =65 years | 0.640 | ||
| No | 1092 (56.9%) | 54 (54.0%) | |
| Yes | 827 (43.1%) | 46 (46.0%) | |
| Sex | 0.727 | ||
| Male | 1204 (62.7%) | 65 (65.0%) | |
| Female | 715 (37.3%) | 35 (35.0%) | |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.9 ± 3.0 | 23.8 ± 3.1 | 0.805 |
| BMI (> = 25 kg/m2) | 0.648 | ||
| No | 1280 (66.7%) | 64 (64.0%) | |
| Yes | 638 (33.3%) | 36 (36.0%) | |
| Tumor location | 0.127 | ||
| Right | 501 (26.4%) | 19 (19.0%) | |
| Left | 1397 (73.6%) | 81 (81.0%) | |
| Heavy alcohol consumption | 1 | ||
| No | 1261 (65.7%) | 66 (66.0%) | |
| Yes | 658 (34.3%) | 34 (34.0%) | |
| GOT | 22.3 ± 9.0 | 21.8 ± 9.6 | 0.559 |
| GPT | 20.3 ± 12.8 | 19.8 ± 16.0 | 0.737 |
| Fatty liver | 0.283 | ||
| No | 1743 (95.0%) | 96 (98.0%) | |
| Yes | 91 (5.0%) | 2 (2.0%) | |
| T stage | < 0.001 | ||
| T1 stage | 359 (18.7%) | 4 (4.0%) | |
| T2 stage | 352 (18.3%) | 6 (6.0%) | |
| T3 stage | 1106 (57.6%) | 74 (74.0%) | |
| T4 stage | 102 (5.3%) | 16 (16.0%) | |
| N stage | < 0.001 | ||
| N0 | 1293 (67.4%) | 28 (28.0%) | |
| N1 | 463 (24.1%) | 39 (39.0%) | |
| N2 | 163 (8.5%) | 33 (33.0%) | |
| Lymph node metastasis | < 0.001 | ||
| Absent | 1293 (67.4%) | 28 (28.0%) | |
| Present | 626 (32.6%) | 72 (72.0%) | |
| Overall stage | < 0.001 | ||
| Stage 1 | 581 (30.3%) | 6 (6.0%) | |
| Stage 2 | 658 (34.3%) | 18 (18.0%) | |
| Stage 3 | 680 (35.4%) | 76 (76.0%) | |
| Angiolymphatic invasion | < 0.001 | ||
| Absent | 1434 (77.0%) | 57 (57.6%) | |
| Present | 429 (23.0%) | 42 (42.4%) | |
| Venous invasion | < 0.001 | ||
| Absent | 1729 (92.8%) | 75 (75.8%) | |
| Present | 134 (7.2%) | 24 (24.2%) | |
| Postoperative follow up duration | 1893.5 ± 767.7 | 1554.5 ± 784.9 | < 0.001 |
| 5-year Mortality | |||
| Alive | 1919 (100.0%) | 61 (61.0%) | < 0.001 |
| Dead | 0 (0.0%) | 39 (39.0%) |
Performances of the prediction models in the test set for 5-year mortality and 5-year metachronous liver metastasis
| Predictors | Logistic regression classification | Random forest classification |
|---|---|---|
| Prediction model for 5-year metachronous liver metastasis | ||
| Clinical* | 0.709 +/− 0.038 | 0.692 +/− 0.038 |
| PC1 | 0.606 +/− 0.044 | 0.557 +/− 0.043 |
| PC1-PC2 | 0.600 +/− 0.042 | 0.536 +/− 0.042 |
| PC1-PC3 | 0.588 +/− 0.040 | 0.503 +/− 0.046 |
| PC1-PC4 | 0.580 +/− 0.040 | 0.520 +/− 0.042 |
| 0.697 +/− 0.038 | ||
| Clinical + PC1-PC2 | 0.744 +/− 0.036 | 0.676 +/− 0.043 |
| Clinical + PC1-PC3 | 0.740 +/− 0.038 | 0.668 +/− 0.042 |
| Clinical + PC1-PC4 | 0.736 +/− 0.038 | 0.691 +/− 0.042 |
| Prediction model for 5-year mortality | ||
| Clinical* | 0.704 +/− 0.028 | 0.679 +/− 0.030 |
| PC1 | 0.482 +/− 0.031 | 0.511 +/− 0.030 |
| Clinical + PC1 | 0.695 +/− 0.031 | 0.647 +/− 0.033 |
*Clinical: Age, Sex, T stage, N stage
Multivariate logistic regression analysis for 5-year metachronous liver metastasis
| Beta (standard error) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Age (> = 65 years) | 0.119 (0.213) | 0.213 |
| Gender (Female) | −0.232 (0.223) | 0.297 |
| T3, T4 stage | 1.276 (0.345) | < 0.001 |
| N1, N2 stage | 1.467 (0.234) | < 0.001 |
Fig. 2Kaplan Meier plots for metachronous liver metastasis free survival and overall survival using 1st PC of image features. a. Metachronous liver metastasis free survival The populations were divided by the optimal cut offs for PC1 score based on MaxStat (− 0.135). The difference between two group was compared by univariate cox proportional hazard regression. The 5-year metachronous liver metastasis free survival of low group (PC1 score below − 0.135) was 89.6% and the high group (PC 1score above − 0.135) was 95.9%. b. Overall survival Using the same PC1 group, K-M plot was visualized for overall survival
Fig. 3Correlation plots for 1st PC and clinical variables. Correlations with p-value > 0.05 are considered as insignificant. In this case the correlation coefficient values are leaved blank or crosses are added. 1st PCA had significant correlation with sex, body mass index, alcohol consumption and fatty liver status